- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14991 MFA No. 9376 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9376 OF 2015 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., 2ND CROSS, ASHOKA NAGARA, MANDYA, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER AT TP HUB, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, NO.9, 2ND FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. APPELLANT (BY SRI. A K BHAT.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. NO. 292/B, MUDAGANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, DUDDA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK-571 401. (OWNER OF AUTO KA-11-A-2044). 2. SOMASHEKARA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O. KARIGOWDA @ BALAIAH, 3. SMT. MANGALAMMA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, W/O. SOMASHEKARA, 4. KUM. HEMALATHA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, D/O. SOMASHEKARA, NO.2, 3 AND 4 ARE ALL R/O.GIDDEGOWDANA KOPPALU VILLAGE, Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14991 MFA No. 9376 of 2015 DUDDA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK-571 401. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R BHADRINATH.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. PRATHAP KUMAR M.S., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.08.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1937/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, MANDYA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,00,000/- WITH INTEREST OF 9% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT AND ETC,. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the insurer impugning the judgment and award dated 29.08.2015 passed in MVC.No.1937/2012 by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Mandya1, whereunder, the Tribunal has allowed the claim petition and awarded a compensation of ₹5,00,000/- together with interest at 9% per annum and directed respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly to be pay the compensation awarded. Being aggrieved by the same, respondent No.2 has preferred the present appeal. 2. The primary contention put forth by the appellant in the present appeal is that, the driver of the insured vehicle did 1 Hereinafter referred as to 'the Tribunal' - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14991 MFA No. 9376 of 2015 not have a valid license and the insurer ought not to be fastened with the liability to pay the compensation. 3. The Tribunal considering the said contention put forth by the insurer in the claim proceedings noticed that, the Investigating Officer has filed a charge sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle for driving a vehicle without a driving license. However, the insurer has not adduced any evidence in support of its contention that the driver of the insured vehicle did not have a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. The Tribunal while relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rukmani and others V.s New India Assurance Co. and Others2 and the decision of this court in the case of Iffco-tokio General Insurance Co.ltd., V.s K. Prabhakar Reddy and Another3 has held that, in the absence of the insurer adducing any evidence in support of its contention that the driver of the insured vehicle did not have a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident, mere production of the charge sheet is insufficient to exonerate the insurer from its liability to pay the compensation. 2 1998(9) SCC 160 3 2014 (4) TAC 623 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14991 MFA No. 9376 of 2015 4. Although, it is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that, the insurer is required to be exonerated from payment of compensation, no other authority is placed on record in support of the contention that mere production of charge sheet is sufficient to exonerate the insurer from payment of compensation. The appellant has failed to demonstrate that, the finding of the Tribunal is in any manner erroneous and liable to be interfered with by this Court in the present appeal. 5. Accordingly, the above appeal is dismissed as being devoid of merit. The amount deposited by the appellant be transmitted to Tribunal for disbursement in terms of the award of the Tribunal. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9